Electronic Arts, better known as EA, has pulled the links to real weapon sales sites from its "Medal of Honor" Web page. EA's "Medal of Honor" site has traditionally partnered with weapons companies, since the game features these real weapons available for purchase.

The reason behind this is pretty obvious if you've heard about recent shootings in the U.S. The most recent occurred in a Newtown, Connecticut elementary school where 26 children and school staff were killed by gunfire. Before that, a man shot and killed many people in an Aurora, Colorado theater.

"There exists in this country, sadly, a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells and stows violence against its own people," said NRA vice president Wayne LaPierre.

"Medal of Honor" was originally published by EA Games in 1999, where much of the series takes place in World War II. The newer versions mainly focus on modern warfare.

Back in 2010, the "Medal of Honor" was banned from the military due to multiplayer Taliban characters featured in the game. Just last month, seven Navy SEALs were charged and punished for releasing confidential information to EA during the making of "Medal of Honor: Warfighter." The seven Navy SEALs consist of two Senior Chief Special Operators and five Chief Special Operators, which all received letters of reprimand and a cut of half their pay for two months.

Or until you know somebody has to actually pay for all of those armed guards!

As for the banning of assault weapons, I have no problem banning them, as I do not feel there really is a need to have them, but I also do not think that would make any difference in this type of situation. Somebody with 2 semi-auto 9mm handguns with extra clips could do just as much if they wanted.

Rukkian posted "... I have no problem banning them, as I do not feel there really is a need to have them, ..."

Well, I guess it's very fortunate then that what you "feel" has no significance when it comes to the U.S. Constitution, right? The law is not about "feelings" and this is precisely why we call demands for gun bans a knee-jerk reaction (as opposed to reasoned thoughts). A ban would solve nothing; it would have zero impact on reducing these tragic occurrences. So why ban anything then? Because politicians with ambitions of ever increasing power do not like the idea of an armed people. It's a pesky obstacle to them.